TSTP Solution File: KRS086+1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : KRS086+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Aug 31 05:39:12 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : KRS086+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 02:08:42 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.63 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.63 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.63 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.63 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.63 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.63 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.63 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 % File : KRS086+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.20/0.63 % Domain : Knowledge Representation (Semantic Web)
% 0.20/0.63 % Problem : DL Test: t7.3
% 0.20/0.63 % Version : Especial.
% 0.20/0.63 % English :
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Refs : [Bec03] Bechhofer (2003), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.20/0.63 % : [TR+04] Tsarkov et al. (2004), Using Vampire to Reason with OW
% 0.20/0.63 % Source : [Bec03]
% 0.20/0.63 % Names : inconsistent_description-logic-Manifest030 [Bec03]
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.63 % Rating : 0.00 v3.1.0
% 0.20/0.63 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 1 unt; 0 def)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of atoms : 64 ( 15 equ)
% 0.20/0.63 % Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of connectives : 45 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 21 &)
% 0.20/0.63 % ( 4 <=>; 17 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.20/0.63 % Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 5 avg)
% 0.20/0.63 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of predicates : 11 ( 10 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of variables : 52 ( 49 !; 3 ?)
% 0.20/0.63 % SPC : FOF_UNS_RFO_SEQ
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Comments : Sean Bechhofer says there are some errors in the encoding of
% 0.20/0.63 % datatypes, so this problem may not be perfect. At least it's
% 0.20/0.63 % still representative of the type of reasoning required for OWL.
% 0.20/0.63 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 fof(cUnsatisfiable_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.63 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.63 & cUnsatisfiable(A) )
% 0.20/0.63 => cUnsatisfiable(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 fof(cowlNothing_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.63 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.63 & cowlNothing(A) )
% 0.20/0.63 => cowlNothing(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 fof(cowlThing_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.63 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.63 & cowlThing(A) )
% 0.20/0.63 => cowlThing(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 fof(cp1_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.63 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.63 & cp1(A) )
% 0.20/0.64 => cp1(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rf_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rf(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rf(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rf_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rf(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rf(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rinvF_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rinvF(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rinvF(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rinvF_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rinvF(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rinvF(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rinvR_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rinvR(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rinvR(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rinvR_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rinvR(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rinvR(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rr_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rr(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rr(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(rr_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & rr(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rr(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(xsd_integer_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & xsd_integer(A) )
% 0.20/0.64 => xsd_integer(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 fof(xsd_string_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.64 & xsd_string(A) )
% 0.20/0.64 => xsd_string(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----Thing and Nothing
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( cowlThing(X)
% 0.20/0.64 & ~ cowlNothing(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----String and Integer disjoint
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( xsd_string(X)
% 0.20/0.64 <=> ~ xsd_integer(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----Equality cUnsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( cUnsatisfiable(X)
% 0.20/0.64 <=> ? [Y] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( rf(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.64 & ? [Z] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( rinvF(Y,Z)
% 0.20/0.64 & ? [W] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( rf(Z,W)
% 0.20/0.64 & ~ cp1(W) ) )
% 0.20/0.64 & cp1(Y) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----Super cowlThing
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_3,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( cowlThing(X)
% 0.20/0.64 => ! [Y0,Y1] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( rf(X,Y0)
% 0.20/0.64 & rf(X,Y1) )
% 0.20/0.64 => Y0 = Y1 ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----Inverse: rinvF
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_4,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [X,Y] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( rinvF(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.64 <=> rf(Y,X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----Inverse: rinvR
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_5,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [X,Y] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( rinvR(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.64 <=> rr(Y,X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----Transitive: rr
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_6,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ! [X,Y,Z] :
% 0.20/0.64 ( ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.64 & rr(Y,Z) )
% 0.20/0.64 => rr(X,Z) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %----i2003_11_14_17_19_42328
% 0.20/0.64 fof(axiom_7,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_19_42328) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.64 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.64 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.64 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.64 %ClaNum:35(EqnAxiom:19)
% 0.20/0.64 %VarNum:55(SingletonVarNum:26)
% 0.20/0.64 %MaxLitNum:6
% 0.20/0.64 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.64 %SharedTerms:2
% 0.20/0.64 [20]P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.64 [21]~P2(x211)
% 0.20/0.64 [22]P9(x221)+P3(x221)
% 0.20/0.64 [23]~P9(x231)+~P3(x231)
% 0.20/0.64 [24]~P1(x241)+P4(f2(x241))
% 0.20/0.64 [25]~P1(x251)+~P4(f3(x251))
% 0.20/0.64 [26]~P1(x261)+P5(x261,f2(x261))
% 0.20/0.64 [27]~P1(x271)+P5(f4(x271),f3(x271))
% 0.20/0.64 [28]~P1(x281)+P6(f2(x281),f4(x281))
% 0.20/0.64 [29]~P6(x292,x291)+P5(x291,x292)
% 0.20/0.64 [30]~P5(x302,x301)+P6(x301,x302)
% 0.20/0.64 [31]~P8(x312,x311)+P7(x311,x312)
% 0.20/0.64 [32]~P7(x322,x321)+P8(x321,x322)
% 0.20/0.64 [33]~P5(x333,x331)+E(x331,x332)+~P5(x333,x332)
% 0.20/0.64 [34]~P8(x341,x343)+P8(x341,x342)+~P8(x343,x342)
% 0.20/0.64 [35]~P5(x351,x353)+~P6(x353,x354)+P1(x351)+P4(x352)+~P5(x354,x352)+~P4(x353)
% 0.20/0.64 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.64 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.20/0.64 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.20/0.64 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.20/0.64 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41),f2(x42))
% 0.20/0.64 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f3(x51),f3(x52))
% 0.20/0.64 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x61),f4(x62))
% 0.20/0.64 [7]~P1(x71)+P1(x72)+~E(x71,x72)
% 0.20/0.64 [8]~P2(x81)+P2(x82)+~E(x81,x82)
% 0.20/0.64 [9]~P3(x91)+P3(x92)+~E(x91,x92)
% 0.20/0.64 [10]~P9(x101)+P9(x102)+~E(x101,x102)
% 0.20/0.64 [11]P8(x112,x113)+~E(x111,x112)+~P8(x111,x113)
% 0.20/0.64 [12]P8(x123,x122)+~E(x121,x122)+~P8(x123,x121)
% 0.20/0.64 [13]P5(x132,x133)+~E(x131,x132)+~P5(x131,x133)
% 0.20/0.64 [14]P5(x143,x142)+~E(x141,x142)+~P5(x143,x141)
% 0.20/0.64 [15]~P4(x151)+P4(x152)+~E(x151,x152)
% 0.20/0.64 [16]P6(x162,x163)+~E(x161,x162)+~P6(x161,x163)
% 0.20/0.64 [17]P6(x173,x172)+~E(x171,x172)+~P6(x173,x171)
% 0.20/0.64 [18]P7(x182,x183)+~E(x181,x182)+~P7(x181,x183)
% 0.20/0.64 [19]P7(x193,x192)+~E(x191,x192)+~P7(x193,x191)
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(40,plain,
% 0.20/0.64 (P6(f2(a1),f4(a1))),
% 0.20/0.64 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,26,25,24,28])).
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(42,plain,
% 0.20/0.64 (P5(f4(a1),f3(a1))),
% 0.20/0.64 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,26,25,24,28,27])).
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(44,plain,
% 0.20/0.64 (~E(f2(a1),f3(a1))),
% 0.20/0.64 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,26,25,24,28,27,15])).
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(48,plain,
% 0.20/0.64 (~P6(f3(a1),a1)),
% 0.20/0.64 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,26,25,24,28,27,15,7,33,29])).
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(57,plain,
% 0.20/0.64 ($false),
% 0.20/0.64 inference(scs_inference,[],[40,48,42,44,2,30,17,29,33]),
% 0.20/0.64 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.64 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.64 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------